Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Call me Arty

#31
Quote from: RawCode on September 08, 2018, 12:13:01 AM
We already seen how "definely not greedy" developers are making games:
A bunch of examples here

Are you trying to say that if the devs made DLC for Rimworld, then they'd go crazy with power? It's sold around a million copies, $30 apiece, with 30% going to Steam. That's already like, twenty-one million AmericaBucks. I'm sure they would've just stopped at B18 or added plate armor as DLC if they were that scummy. Besides, you're completely ignoring Lair of the Shadow Broker, Blood and Wine, Tiny Tina's Assault on Dragon Keep, and everything for New Vegas.
#32
Quote from: Tynan on September 07, 2018, 09:56:43 PM
A few things I feel are just worth noting. Note that I'm not arguing in any particular direction here; I just think it's worth getting some info on the table.

    <Snip>
    • We've never had a sale and I'm not planning one. But of course some day the price will go down, or the game will go on sale. Even if it's not until ten years from now, it'll happen.
    • Two Point Hospital costs $35, seems to have done okay.
    • Crusader Kings 2 costs $40 (but they regularly put it deep on sale).
    • RimWorld did cost $20 if you bought it during the Kickstarter in 2013.
    <Snip>

I'm no market expert, but I feel that I can at least fairly debate these. $30 is an excellent price for Rimworld, and $20 is an amazing deal, but there's a difference between it and the other games listed. Two Point hospital is fresh, backed by Sega, and fits a niche. After a bit of research, I have found that there are not a lot of hospital games, and the ones we have access to on Steam are either not great or not the most serious. Similarly, there aren't many games that can compete with Crusader Kings II and what it does, the closest is another game by the same developers. It's got cult status and the aforementioned frequent sales that can bring it down to a quarter of its price. Rimworld doesn't occupy the niche of no-other-game-like-it, or at least, nothing-else-good-that's-like-it. Prison Architect, Factorio, and Dwarf Fortress are the obvious competitors for attention, with a few choice others such as Rise to Ruins, Banished, and Oxygen not Included being well-received and also hitting the same notes that make Rimworld and the aforementioned titles work.

I'm not here trying to shit on Rimworld, I love it, it's great. There's just a reason why Verdun did so well when Battlefield I hit the scene, or how Team Fortress is still played so much despite all the new hero shooters. I don't think an increase in price would do much good for it's sales, and might just make people more aware of alternatives. I'm not saying it'll bring sales to a standstill, but it will certainly get an article or comment saying "Didja know that Rise to Ruins is like Rimworld in a fantasy setting for a third of the price?"

I personally believe that DLC is still the way to go. If the intention of 1.0 is to finish Rimworld and move on to other projects, then it, of course, isn't. However, if there is still some intent to expand it further, then I think the game should still see work. There is so much potential left in the game and the Cryptosleep Revival Briefing, I'd happily support the DLC - and I'm certain that a sizeable amount of the one million sales would too. Again: Keep the momentum of it's current price going, and get support from those who already bought it.
#33
Quote from: ChJees on September 07, 2018, 11:32:42 AM
a Add-On mod that let you make Droid only colonies :).
Want to play with it myself when they finish it.

  • Same
  • Total expansion mod with the goal of using a suite of droids and androids to terraform a dead/toxic world for human population when?
#34
How about DLC?


Two games that Rimworld has drawn a lot from have sold a fair bit over one million and two million respectively - at $30. If we assume that people look at Rimworld and have a similar level of interest, a price increase may hold it back from similiar levels of success. Say what you will about DLC, but I think that may be the way to go. The game's sold a significant amount of copies, and (no disrespect) it's hard to picture it going too much further at an increased price, as similar games would be available for less and those who thought a not-amazing-looking complicated and harsh colony management sim for $30 (bit of a gamble) already have, it's not a huge demographic. Meanwhile: look at Civilization V. Not only was it already twice the price of Rimworld, but it's best-rated DLC pack added half the price back on in addition to it selling very well in it's vanilla state. Yes, it's apples to oranges, but there's something there. They sell Civ and Scenario packs for around $4.99. The price would have to be adjusted, but the content would translate perfectly. There are plenty of mods that add new factions and respective technology (Rimsenal, Apini, The German Imperial Army), a decent price tag could add new content for existing players, and make what's there look all the more appealing than a price increase alongside "I don't feel like adding more content" (respect the choice, just sayin').

For example: the Cryptosleep Revival Briefing has plenty of more content I'd love to see, without having to "steal" from other games or mods. More additions to the technology we already have (Proof of Concept: Medival Times and Glittertech, averaging 87k subscribers), the addition of robotics and artificial intelligence (Proof of Concept: Androids and Misc Robots++ having 24k and 75k subscribers respectively), xenohumans (Proof of Concept: Beastmen at 14k and Dwarves at 23k, plus, an incredibly handsome man typed this excellent argument), terraforming (MarsX, in addition to getting Tynan's approval, could be seen as a proof of concept for Dead and Toxic worlds), and crimes against nature (Proof of Concept: GeneticRim and Dinosauria averaging 35k subscribers). All of these mods have either personally given me hours of additional content, or might have well because a similiar mod did it instead. All have significant effect on gameplay (as opposed to additional particle effects or bling in a singleplayer game) be it opening a sort of prehistoric park or dwelling longer in a tech level which has no impact beyond it's research speed for one scenario. I'd hardly expect any reviews or articles criticizing the addition of hours more content while keeping the game at $30. That way, the game could technically get a technical price increase, while keeping the momentum of its current price, and giving those who already own the game more ways to support the continued development.
It doesn't even need to have been shown in abstract in a mod, a cactus that whips people and animals with human-level intelligence are objectively interesting.

Or, y'know, just increase the price anyways and add a bit more code that doesn't do anything to the vanilla game so that modders have more things to play around with (like, idunno, enough to manipulate into a scent system, don't think you can do that with what we have now). I have nothing against "just let the modders do it", but the game's developers are at least restricted, in a good way. "I want a big faction" will net you Starwars or Space furries. oh god so many space furries. †

† Not shitting on any of these mods by the way, I've used most of them. I'm just sayin', maybe the occasional cactus, gemstone, insect, or abomination would spice things up a bit.
#35
Quote from: Tynan on September 02, 2018, 12:33:33 AM
Arty: Well, we've had a no-sale policy for a long time and I'm not planning on changing that soon, especially around the 1.0 release. Of course, some day the game will be cheaper (likely years and years in the future) but for the foreseeable future it won't go on sale.

Alright, understandable. I've spent a fair amount of time buying many games for cheap instead of one for full price, but Rimworld may be the game that breaks that rule. . . depending on how soon it takes some of my favorite mods that've missed an update or five to get picked up again (vanilla is fine, but I need my xenohumans!).
#36
 I think some general combat stats got shoved around. I'm not going to look through the hundreds of posts in the 1.0 (now B19) discussion thread, but it would appear that we have a greater divide between some of the canines if I remember correctly. Wargs do a couple point more damage overall, and some of the other pups have been nerfed, so I assume there's a general widening of the divide between pets and war-beasts.
#37
I know it's going to make me sound like a cheapskate, but is there any chance of a sale that may drop the release price of the game below the current early access price? I'm a bit frugal at the moment (not going to give you guys a sob story), and am a bit sale-reliant at the moment. No offense to the developers, I'm not saying your half-a-decade of hard work isn't worth $30-$60, I just can't pay that much in my current position.
#38
General Discussion / Re: rimworld
August 31, 2018, 06:15:35 PM
Quote from: Kryc8 on August 31, 2018, 06:31:51 AM
This post is good

This message is good.
#39
General Discussion / Re: rimworld
August 30, 2018, 03:33:23 PM
yes
#40
 I made a similar post half a year ago, and I'd still love to see it. Without regurgitating the whole thing again here: There's a lot of pretty neat events in Rimworld that don't get the attention they deserve. Lots of pawns die for a lot of reasons, but I'd love to personally mount the head of the raider who killed my favorite pawn in the dining hall, or the room of the pawn's best friend. It would surely have a lot more character to it than armchair made of a composition of similar leathers no. 37, like we have now. Most creatures already have a dedicated head sprite (as Aile pointed out). Since most animals are quadrupeds, a skin rug could easily just be some generic sprite the same color as that animal's leather.
#41
Quote from: bobucles on August 28, 2018, 09:53:16 AM
The problem with giving pawns a reduced sensitivity to pain is as easy to see as giving them go juice. The only thing it does is make them fight until they lose a leg or die. Pain is the main mechanic that stops your pawns from dying.

Well you see: that's exactly the trade-off. -25% to aiming accuracy, "man that sucks". -25% to aiming accuracy, -50% to aiming time, "oh man, now it's a risk". Same with the balances of work speed and mental break threshold with neurotic, the mood bonus at the cost of defense with nudist, and gourmands eating enough for another half of a colonist while having an increased cooking skill. Yes, your pawn can fight longer, and that little bit longer may be the difference in repelling a group of pirates, saving a vital structure, or keeping a fellow pawn from being abducted. However, that same bonus can keep them from falling over after a certain amount of pain or blood loss, which means that they may be more likely to die as a result of injuries you didn't know were as severe as they were, or a disease that would have downed a normal pawn, but meant they walked around just enough to provoke it into progressing to the next stage. Maybe they collapse at critical damage and have pirates ignore them, only to get executed with one shot due to their incredibly low health once they get up again. It is your responsibility as the overseer of a "tough" pawn to ensure that they receive special attention, like your nervous doctor or bloodlusting gardener, or any of the other pawns who are good with a twist.
#42
Quote from: Namsan on August 28, 2018, 11:34:33 AM
I think people with tough traits are biologically modified or something.
Quote from: Third_Of_Five on August 28, 2018, 06:09:07 PM
Is it a common trait? If not I could see it being explained away as being the result of genetic modification or whatever.
. . .
Quote from: TrapsterJ on August 28, 2018, 01:37:50 PM
Maybe by tough it means they're physically built or hardened to the point that they're like Logan who can just grunt bullets out of his body or more realistically they're just someone more adapted to taking harm and takes more to actually damage them like a way a soldier would tough it through with adrenaline and training.
Quote from: Kirby23590 on August 28, 2018, 08:16:17 PM
. . .
However i stand in disbelief and don't have any issues since this is a video game a form of entertainment of wasting our times having fun with. He or she might have been a clone or has the blood of arnold schwarzenegger in him or her, making him/her a half-soldiermorph eating some bullets or squirrel bites before he/she falls. Besides nobody in games likes to die in 3 shots or in 1 shot from a little dinky pistol that's not a revolver or a desert eagle from a computer controlled enemy, it adds frustration throwing you back to your last checkpoint or were you last saved.

I have no issue with tanking bullets, arrows, fireballs - whatever - in most videogames, as they do not explain things or go into care the same way that Rimworld may. You and your enemies in Skyrim grow tougher "because you're the Dragonborn or somethin', Idunno. Now go and get kill that raider who still wants to fight after you decapitated six of his friends". Doom doesn't tell you how much health an enemy has or how much damage a gun does, you just know you have to hit a Cacodemon around seven times with the shotgun to kill it. Meanwhile: Rimworld does go into that detail. Your pawn isn't just "good with a gun", they're good with the gun because they had to learn to shoot as they grew-up on an apocalyptic planet (which was apoctalyptic because of mass climate change, unlike a Mario World that's icy or sandy just because). It was a useful skill to have, so they learned it and practiced it. The same applies to traits: Masochists are wired differently, pyromaniacs start fires because they love them, cannibals once tried and liked human, there is no "just because".

I dislike tough because it feels like a pawn is tough "just because" with no background to it, even though Rimworld is filled with plenty of reasons. Soldiermorphs are designed for combat, Gravity Dwarves are naturally a bit tougher, messing with your genes for fashion is a known phenomenon and could logically mean that carbon nanofibers under your skin or chitin was like, totally in on the planet the pawn came from. If either of these were the case, I would hope for more playable pawns that are different breeds of human, or for the trait to say something like "Sam's father comes from a long line of Gravity Dwarves, and has passed down some of their tough bones and muscle". Hell, I'd even accept "lucky" over "tough", because action heroes are still human. If someone on the street dies from one gunshot but Johnny Action takes half the capacity of a submachinegun, it's because the single bullet hit a major artery or organ. Johnny Action is either poorly written, or has a remarkable pain threshold and took the bullets in a lot of nonvital places that perfectly outline the things you really don't want shot. No amount of training or practice helps you survive getting shot, you either have more muscle or fat around the area that may slow the bullet, are more accustomed to pain so that you are more prepared to get shot (bullets still leave holes, pain changes nothing), or you have enough adrenaline to keep you awake long enough to not pass-out from blood loss as fast. We know that storytellers and psychic forces exist like deities, so saying "Stewart has always been naturally lucky. Where other would break a leg, he would land just right and gets away with a sprained ankle." Therefor, another pawn might get a direct hit, while a lucky pawn could get grazed, or have their heart one centimeter to the left, so it only gets scratched instead of stabbed.

TL;DR: If a pawn or someone in their bloodline has been genetically engineered, selectively bred, or subject to a series of mutations, it should be mentioned in their background or the "tough" trait itself. If not, then the existence of supernatural forces in the universe could justify the trait being changed to "Lucky", implying that bullets are just innacurate enough to keep the pawn alive where other pawns may die. If you had an infinite number of twins who took identical gunshots, one would never survive a lethal shot due to the fact that they were once in an action movie, or felt less pain.
#43
Like the changes. Is there a reason for Core Vanilla Hair at the top of your posts btw? Doesn't seem like you put anything after them.
#44
 Welp, it's official now. Time to hold-out for a green-thumb treatment.
#45
Ideas / Re: Farming can be a bit tedious.
August 26, 2018, 03:01:01 AM
 That's kinda just the nature of farming. Not sure if you could make it less tedious unless there was a percentage chance that you uprooted an insectoid hive when harvesting a potato plant.

As much as I don't like saying "just let mods do it", I feel like these are just insignificant enough to get put on the backburner. There isn't always a lot of fertile soil, and you only need to account for maybe three patches of the stuff per colony, once you've got your walls comfortably built. Probably less, once you get hydroponics and more structures going. Blight's in a similar camp, where I have about one every year or two. It's easy enough to see and cut blights.

Don't get me wrong, I love farming. I do it in every game that gives me the chance, and Vegetable Garden is in my top five mods (not including Quality of Life, those win by default) easy. It's just better to not look at farming as it's own thing. Rather, part of food, drug, or textile production, right next to butchering, brewing, and sewing. Those are all tedious, but that doesn't mean we need to focus on the individual parts.